Yeah, it sucks that only liberals react badly to other people's opinions. I'm still trying to figure out exactly which left-wing commie pinko kept putting David Duke for Governor stickers over my No Dukes ones back in the 90s.

I know adult men who live with their mothers because their mothers really shouldn't be living alone.

And even if his elderly mother doesn't need care (or anyone to notice if she falls and breaks a hip) it still makes no sense at all for one old woman to live in a huge house in that area. Should she sell it and move into a tiny apartment? And if she's living in it, does it not make *sense* for family members to live there too?

And Beth, people should not have messed with your bumper stickers, but that hardly rates up there with keying a door... I'm sure you didn't need to pay for a paint job, just another bumper sticker.

And keying a car doesn't rate to destroying one with a baseball bat.

I don't know if car vandalization goes primarily one direction or not. It may just seem like it does because I just happened to not hear about the opposite.

And people wonder why I want to leave this area...jobs are plentiful, salaries are high, the women are adorable, but the citizens are frickin' nuts.

The Hummer wouldn't be my first choice in vehicles, but I can't see trashing one.

It's funny - the major cause of air pollution in DC (besides hot air) is from the coal plants in the Ohio Valley. I wonder if these people who are so dedicated to the environment would take baseball bats to a power plant?

This is why I didn't put a "Bush/Cheney '04" bumper sticker on my car. I live in California and I like my paint job just the way it is.

Amen, Revenant. And I live in a decidedly RED part of California and still worry about my paint job. How scary is this that we have to be afraid of our own neighbors?? Who are the terrorists in our own complacent neighborhoods???

Sounds like his neighbors, the pious Prius owners, are dismayed by what happened.

Oh, please:

"The neighborhood in general is very concerned with racial purity," said Liem, a white resident. "It's mostly white. It's ridiculous for a black man to move here." Liem added quickly that she does not condone violence.

Would you spin that as "dismay" over the beating of a black resident?

"The neighborhood in general is very concerned with the environment," said Liem, whose Prius gets about 48 miles a gallon compared with the Hummer's 14 miles a gallon. "It's more liberal leaning. It's ridiculous to be driving a Hummer." Liem added quickly that she does not condone violence.

Dismay? Yeah right. Sure, the press found ONE neighbor willing to express genuine regret, but that's not exactly impressive, now is it.

Amen, Revenant. And I live in a decidedly RED part of California and still worry about my paint job. How scary is this that we have to be afraid of our own neighbors??

I wouldn't have thought of it myself, only I knew two people whose property was vandalized by people suffering from Bush Derangement Syndrome. Why take the chance, especially in a state like California that will inevitably vote for the leftie in any election that isn't already a landslide for the Republican candidate?

My in laws live on that street, albeit quite a few blocks from that neighborhood. If his neighborhood is anything like theirs, we're talking ridiculously giant houses. And if his mother is anything like my husband's grandmother, she will not abandon the house on anything but a stretcher. I agree with Synova - there could be any number of reasons for his situation.

I think Hummers are ridiculous for a lot of reasons, including but not limited to their environmental impact. But, this guy has caught our attention for the sole reason that he was attacked by people who disagree with him. How does *he* become the object of ridicule here...?

I have no idea whether liberals or conservatives are behind more politically motivated vandalism, but neither group has a lock on intolerance. Here in Armyland, I'm always surprised and a little impressed when I see someone driving around with strong anti-war messages on their car. I may not agree with them, but I have to think they're taking at least a small risk.

Yes, it's a hate crime. Once you distinguish between crime that's not motivated by hate and crime that is, well, hate can take all kinds of forms.

I agree with Peter. This is obviously a hate crime. A political one at that. If the perps are caught, they should be charged with a "super-crime." Sentencing should take this into account, with a longer sentence than if they had attacked a Ford Taurus.

"The neighborhood in general is very concerned with modesty," said Liem, whose skirt covers her ankles, compared with the victim's miniskirt. "It's more conservative leaning. It's ridiculous to be wearing a miniskirt." Liem added quickly that she does not condone violence.

There's no parallelism between your hyperbolic racial supremecy scenario and what the neighbor said, not in meaning, nor in grammar.

The parallel, which you were apparently too dim to grasp, is that in both cases the neighbors start off by explaining that the victim was a moral inferior who had been doing the wrong thing, before following that up with a half-assed disavowal of violence.

Similarly, if the scenario had involved the sexual assault of a woman, the neighbor would have started out with a condemnation of flirtatious behavior and skanky clothing before belatedly conceding that sexual assault is, of course, wrong.

They throw out a clear signal that the guy deserved SOME form of punishment, in their view -- hell, he'd been asking for it, driving a politically incorrect car in their "environmentally conscientious neighborhood" -- and then toss in a "oh, but violence is bad" upon realizing they just flaunted their intolerance to an actual reporter.

If the rational beings here are going to to start calling a woman with whom they disagree a "bitch," silly or otherwise, hanging around Althouse just isn't worth the effort. Rather like Godwins Law re: the mention of Hitler, it is all downhill from there once calling a woman a "bitch" becomes unremarkable and acceptable.

Despite widespread use by rap artisits and other, the term is crude and rude, and remains one of the most offensive in our language, particularly when directed at an individual.

At least I now know there are lefty, Gore-crazy neighborhoods where most of the residents actually drive fuel efficient cars. Here, in a Gore-crazy eastern suburb of Cleveland, there's an SUV in virtually every driveway.

Beth: Couldn't have anything to do with being 32 and living with his mommy.

The dude's the innocent victim of a crime that has caused him a lot of hassle and stress and you go through the article trying to find ways to look down on him and ridicule him. For what? He's working a job and saved up for his dream car, is starting his own business, and loves his elderly mom enough to live with her. I have no idea what he's like, but on the surface it appears he's just trying to live the American Dream and is also a good son.

"This blog in general is very concerned with intelligent arguments," said Aluwid, referring to Beth's silly posts. "It's more intellectual leaning. It's ridiculous to come in here and make inane posts that can't be defended."

Aluwid added quickly that he does not condone calling women the "b" word.-----

How much "dismay" does my language suggest that I feel about Revenants poor choice of words? Or does it give the impression that, while I personally am opposed to such activity, she pretty much deserved it?

Beth, do you ever post anything but bullshit tu quoque rants? I remember in the "crazy lefty posters" thread last week a handful of people mention what a wonderful contributor you were, and I'd like to get a bottle of whatever happy pills they're taking.

More ecofascism, its use of violence condoned (in not being condemned) by the left, who fashion themselves nonviolent despite their vicious history.

It reminds me of Irish peace activist and Nobel Peace Prize winner Betty Williams' recent speech at the International Women's Peace Conference in Dallas in which she stated ""Right now, I could kill George Bush," she said. "No, I don't mean that. How could you nonviolently kill somebody? I would love to be able to do that."

The Dallas News reported that " As she made her point, she chuckled and some members of the audience laughed. "At the end, she got a standing ovation.

Sounds like the Hummer guy's neighbors were equally "dismayed" by the violence against property. This type of act usually ends, not in aquiescence or agreement, but in retaliation. Against whom? The 'dismayed'.

How is this any worse than random vandalism? Or vandalism because they thought the victim was an asshole (for example, the occasional high school practice of flattening a disliked teacher's tires, keying his/her car, etc.)?

That said, my basic experience with large single-occupant vehicles leads me to conjecture that either owning one slowly but surely turns you into a jerk or the people who would potentially buy one (as a single-occupant vehicle) are primarily jerks already. Either way, there's a correlation between large, single-occupant vehicles and jerks, just as there's a correlation between jesus/darwin fish or religious/political bumper stickers of any kind and jerks.

I don't think their vehicles should be vandalized, but I'd like it if I never saw one on the road again.

So it is a bad thing that he loves his mom? Beth, I know you appreciate and treasure your freedom to associate and live with whom you please. I support that for you. It is disingenuous to criticize him for living with whom he pleases just because you do not like his ride.

It's possible that Mr. Humvee owner is living with his mother for entirely unselfish reasons. That said, in general I would be unthrilled if my daughter (when she's >25 years old) started dating someone who is living with his mother. At some point in life one must become independent. Living with Mom does not translate to independence for me.

Of course, that's no reason to trash a man's ride. There really isn't any reason to do that. That block of houses in DC doesn't seem like much of a neighborhood, given the lukewarm empathy the vandalism engenders there.

Now we know what the trolls on blogs like this do in their spare time.

This is a classic example of the "greenie's" version of patriotism. They believe they are acting on their righteous beliefs so are justified in violating the law to move their agenda forward.

As stated previously, these people are thugs and terrorists, nothing less. If these Prius huggers hate Hummers, they would certainly not be happy with a couple of hidden cameras recording the activities.

These people are dangerous and deserve prison under RICO and terrorism laws.

I won't be surprised if it turns out that the vandals did this because the Hummer owner hit on someone else's girlfriend or something like that. Does that make this any less of a crime? Not in my opinion.

Jennifer asked: "But, this guy has caught our attention for the sole reason that he was attacked by people who disagree with him. How does *he* become the object of ridicule here...?"

Good question. My neighbor's son has just moved back in to care for his ailing mother. I never much liked the guy, but I've just gained a boatload of respect for him.

I'd never buy a Hummer, but anyone who has even the tiniest bit of "he had it coming" attitude over this incident ought to be ashamed of themselves (IMHO).

And Greg is right. The thugs will probably end up accomplishing their goal; this guy will get rid of his Hummer. And they'll feel so good about themselves. And the neighbors will nod their heads in approval ("well, I wouldn't have done it, but it's better for the earth, ya know.") Jerks. All of them.

What's worthy of ridicule is the number of commenters here who think that unless it's stipulated directly, anyone with any sense thinks it's just fine to bash this guy's property. His neighbors don't think so, nor has anyone here said anything remotely in support of the criminals who destroyed his ghastly vehicle.

But I make no apologies for making fun of the guy. He's ridiculous, and he drives a ridiculous thing. Hummers are idiot vehicles. There's nothing wrong with making of him, of anyone who buys one for that matter. There's nothing wrong with his neighbors wearing their I Hate Hummer t-shirts, or walking around singing You Gotta be Dumber to Drive a Hummer songs. As long as they don't take a bat to it, they can think and say whatever they like.

This article isn't a little crime report, with a dry few lines describing "vehicle damage, 600 Block Avenue A." It's a story, and there's plenty in the story to react to. I find the 32-year-old guy living with him mom, driving a behemoth, funny.

I also find the outrage of Revenant and others hilarious. Revenant can always be relied on to present the "I'll argue anything" lawyer performance and with a little goading, he hits the really high notes. Jeff's little schoolmarm finger wagging is pretty funny, too.

tmink, don't be disingenuous. I'm not criticizing him for living with his mother. I'm speculating on a link between his dedication to mommy and his need for a really, really big symbol. Nothing new there, Sigmund.

I dunno, Beth. It's one thing to mock the Hummer-guy-still-living-in-Mom's basement. (That is aways good for a laugh). It's quite another not to react viscerally when someone's property is destroyed, even if he lives in his Mom's basement.

The same complaint against a woman wearing a too-short skirt is apt. Why mock the miniskirt wearer when she got attacked? Too much he asked for it creeps in, too much indifference to crime tends to be rewarded with more crime. The whole broken windows thing is true.

In a neighborhood, you have to vigorously defend against every such event, lest it be the one that lets in all sorts of follow-up crime, just because you didn't happen to like the guy it happened to, or because the phallic symbolism has you in stitches. In such manner whole blocks are lost.

Pogo, I just can't join you in the desire for everyone to ritually step forth and declare outrage. It's obvious that it's wrong to vandalize property. It's never right to destroy what belongs to someone else. Who needs this repeated to them? Only the criminals who vandalize. I don't think they're reading this blog entry. I'm not going to join in that exercise.

Others here are trying to stretch the neighbors' Hummer hatred into a cause for what happened to the guy's property. Until the police find such a connection, that's wrongheaded.

Because when you're on the left, you believe your dogma is morally superior to all others. So that gives you the holy right and duty to assume motivation, lecture and scold, and occasionally destroy some property. All for the greater good, you see, and to put those righties in their place!

And I thought a "hate" crime is one where the motivation for an "ordinary" crime or vandalism is hate. Once they try the perp, we will know.

Well, the article only quotes two neighbors. Fremaux's comments are heartening. She feels bad about what happened. Liem's attitude is dismaying. And she puts it forth as the neighborhood's consenus opinion, though we only have her word for that.

Re: "Who needs this repeated to them?"People in the neighborhood do. Isolationism ("not my problem") and indifference to crime are the keys to neighborhood decline.

A neighborhood watch is full of folks that you may not care for personally, but you agree to watch their house and they watch yours. You photograph and film miscreants, and call the police. Alot. When a neighborhood is "noisy" in this way, criminals learn (without reading blogs) that they'd better take their act elsewhere.

Modern Otter said... I'd love to know what alternatives were on the GM table when the time came to decide what to name this vehicle.

Name was created by the military when they designated the GI issue Jeep replacement as HMMWV (High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle). Troops always seek a usable name, which became Hummm-Vehicle, then Humm-Vee, then naturally to Hummer because of its salacious double entendre and natural linguistic progression from its unusable military acronym.

Jeep, just as rationally, was born from its own military acronym. They were the GP (General Purpose) military vehicle of their era.

He's ridiculous, and he drives a ridiculous thing. Hummers are idiot vehicles.

Actually, the Prius is a pretty idiotic vehicle. It's way overpriced for the mileage it gets and is basically a waste of money. And as we now know, most Prius owners buy them to make a statement, not because of any rational cost-effectiveness calculation.

I will leave the symbolism involved in vehicle ownership to others--as far as I am (consciously) aware, my personal criteria for a vehicle are (1) usefulness (2) reliability and (3)economy. I don't mind, however, if others buy vehicles to make a statement or just want to conspicuously consume. Its a free country. Were the hummer destroyed to make some type of social statement, that makes the vandalism even worse as far as I am concerned.

It would be for me. Until they make a plug-in hybrid that you don't have to replace the battery on every 5+ years, it makes no economic sense for me. I keep my cars a long time (current car, 9 years old, 31,000 miles, and I still think of it as my "new" car), and the battery replacements would kill me, financially.

I checked into the Prius and I didn't like what I learned. They couldn't tell me that the substantial batteries, both size and expense, were recycled or disposed of.

While we are encouraged to properly dispose of our AA, AAA, etc. batteries, I suspect Prius batteries go to industrial waste sites and are then shipped to a third world country where they are buried, burned, or tossed on a heap so that dreamy eyed lefties can feel smug that they are doing their part.

Their part probably includes polluting someone else's drinking water as long as it isn't in their backyard.

Like the ill-fated windmills off Martha's Vineyards that would spoil the Kennedy/Kerry view of the ocean.

Aluwid's comment ranks near the top as one of the best I've read on this blog.

###

If the Prius didn't have its Hollywood "enviro-cool" factor, not too many of these folks would be driving one. They're posers as much as Hummer enthusiasts--who, I should add, at least don't channel self-righteousness through their car.

So that gives you the holy right and duty to assume motivation, lecture and scold, and occasionally destroy some property.

Thanks, Pat, for precisely illustrating what's ridiculous about the commentary in this thread. The outraged among us don't give a crap about this man's car; they want to paint the left as criminal and destructive, no matter how much contortion is required to do so.

Well, Beth, quite frankly, you lost your moral high ground in this particular thread the instant you let your "living with his mommy" quip fly. You're squelching around in the mud of prejudice and easy assumptions as much as anyone else in this thread.

Wow--this thread, which I foolishly thought was about vandalism with possible an eco motive, has certainly generated lots of sturm und drang as reader_iam astutely notes based on prejudices, assumptions, sprinkled with lots of ad hominums. All of this, it might be noted without any assistance from Lucky, HD, and Doyle. Maybe its just a Thursday thing.

When you are starting a business and cart a lot of stuff around a big vehicle is not ridiculous. Also when you are dealing with a group that looks on the rde as an extensionof the man, a Hummer is a far better choice than a Prius is.

Living with your mother and starting a business could be, and in this have a good chance of being, totally disconnected. Snarky comments about living with your mother and then saying that well I didn't really mean that do not play well.

Last I heard we had the right to buy the vehicle of our choice in this country. In fact diesel cars are a better choice than the Prius is since they get about the same mileage and do not require an expensive new battery and cost less. I am waiting for Prius to come out with a limo so our betters can arrive in style in their Prius limousines and then leave for the jetport while telling everyone they are so supportive of the environment.

I currently drive a Golf diesel which gets about 45 mpg. I want my next car to be fully electric with speakers mounted under the hood so I can play different motor sounds with volume attenuated by the accelerator. That would be cool.

Technically speaking, they keyed "For the environ," not environment, which I point out only because of this definition of the former: "surround; be around." I'd be surprised if the distinction was intentional, though.

Since we've gone off topic anyway, I'm wondering if it would make a difference to anyone if it were a 32-year-old man living with his 70-year-old father, or a 32-year-old woman living with her 70-year-old mother (or father, for that matter).

reader, I don't deny that I'm wallowing in making fun of the guy with the humonguous ride, that he further decorated with even bigger tires and hydraulic lifts, and was described in the story as "living with his mother."

I'm sticking to it because the objections are even more ridiculous. Despite the fevered protests from Revenant, Ted, Fen, Dick, etc., I haven't raised a single defense for destroying private property to make a personal or political statement. I haven't made a "he deserved it" argument, but plenty here have made much more absurd attempts to argue that this crime is a predictable outcome of anti-Hummer sentiments. But it's not. There are, sadly, Hummers all over the damn place, and yet there's no anti-Hummer crime wave sweeping the nation. There's no need to get alarmed and outraged about eco-terrorism--there are a very few incidents of it, and all should be prosecuted.

This attack is a single crime, in a single neighborhood that we have reason to believe is going to hell in handbasket and in dire need of "broken windows" policing. Someone targeted this guy, and when they're arrested, justice should be done.

As long as people here want to wail and rant about leftists and terrorists and my god it's his RIGHT to buy that car, I'll continue to mock. Of course it's his right to buy the stupid thing, and it's my right to mock him for it. Anyone who tries to argue that my mocking is tantamount to picking up a bat and breaking some windows deserves more mockery.

Since we've gone off topic anyway, I'm wondering if it would make a difference to anyone if it were a 32-year-old man living with his 70-year-old father, or a 32-year-old woman living with her 70-year-old mother (or father, for that matter).

Don't know. Don't care. Your point is apt, though. Who he lives with is irrelevant to the story. As one who, at age 51, "lived with my father," and then "lived with my mother" right after that, like you, I'm not prepared to believe this fact reveals some flaw in his personal character. There may be one, BWDIK?

And, I would add that if you read a story about two masked men not just vandalizing, but destroying a car that had a rainbow bumper sticker on it with the message "FOR THE HETERO" or a story about two masked men destroying a Prius with the message "DAMN TREE HUGGER", etc...would your reaction be the same so long as the victim lived with their mother?

Hmmmm...OK, just give some more time to really, really decide on that one.

How about if it were trashed to demonstrate radical political contempt for people who make totally tokenistic responses to the gravest threat this planet has ever faced, but who wouldn't dream of actually fundamentally changing their extravagant lifestyles; who live in houses big enough to fit half a tribe into; who would buy one for the second under-gardener but who wouldn't be seen dead on a bus?

Elizabeth, I consider you one of my friends here on Althouse, and I promise you that I may have misundertsood your post, but I was not being disenguous. Not my style.

You wrote: "I'm not criticizing him for living with his mother. I'm speculating on a link between his dedication to mommy and his need for a really, really big symbol. Nothing new there, Sigmund."

OK, I guess I can understand the tone you took with me because you thought I was being snarky to you. But I was addressing what I understood your point to be. Stuff like that gets lost in email sometimes.

I just do not get your invoking Freudian psychosexual criticism of the dude and insulting your fantasies of his package size. I would be very offended if anyone did the same of you, and I would let them have it here.

Honestly, I understand your not liking Hummers (I drive a PT Cruise or a full minivan myself) but I do not understand the tone and sexual nature of your insults toward him. It is not like you in my estimation. And I bet you know better, as you have been on the receiving end of bigoted sexualized remarks. So what gives?

There is a lot of rancor in this thread. I think it's because we are just SO inundated with eco-bullshit nowadays. You can't pick up a fashion magazine without seeing a spread on "green jeans" (only $250 a pair made from organic cotton!) or a design magazine without running into multiple stories on earth-friendly products or sustainable blah-blah. Entertainers now preach nonstop about global warming. There's no escape--it's simply everywhere nowadays--and it's being peddled 99% of the time by people who are demonstrably big consumers/wasters in their own right.

What this story throws into stark relief is how extreme the environmental movement has become. We've got people walking around passing serious moral judgement on others based on their car! It's behavior tantamount to some sort of snooty, nerdy religious cult. I don't know what to compare it to, actually, but it's odious and annoying.

Trey, I feel bad about disappointing your belief in my better nature. Obviously my getting a laugh from the blatantly obvious Freudian nature of his choice in cars upsets you. It's a soft target (yikes! another innuendo) and not everyone shares the same sense of humor at any given point in time. I didn't intend to be snarky to you--and I don't think I was. I really don't find it funny that he lives with his mom. I got a giggle from the intersection of that with the Hummer. American culture comes fully packed with associations between our psyches and our automobiles.

This fellow and his Hummer are blips. I don't care about them. I find this thread entirely over the top, however, and will continue to be amused by it.

Trey, one more thing: sure, I've been the target of bigoted sexual remarks. But I've also been the target of simple jabs, mere puns or pokes that I took, and will continue to take, with good humor. I can tell the difference between bigotry and the lesser crimes of risque or satirical humor. I'm not a devotee of PC, and I don't get up in arms over every little jest, even those made at my own expense.

Except for a brief time during his late 20s when he was married, my uncle lived with my grandmother until he was 44 years old. My grandmother has since passed on, and at 73 years of age he now lives alone, with a lifestyle about as close to nature as you can get, circa 1880. He is interesting, eccentric, profound, and not like anyone else on this planet. If I found out anyone was analyzing his living situation through a Freudian lens, I would be mighty tempted to find some cars to key. Although my uncle probably would advise spraying the car with skunk essence instead.

Trey, email me, please, if you think we have more to talk about. I do appreciate your friendship here and if my tone in responding to you struck you as off, you're probably right. In a heated thread, it's sometimes beyond me to maintain different voices, say, in responding to very sensible people like yourself and Reader, or Jennifer, as opposed to others that I perceive as being mostly interested in political jabs.

Pogo, I just can't join you in the desire for everyone to ritually step forth and declare outrage. It's obvious that it's wrong to vandalize property

Is it? That was exactly my (and many others') point a couple of months ago when Althouse was so outraged at the Federalist Society by people's failure to explicitly condemn racism. We felt that that condemnation was obvious. That argument seemed to be dismissed by those on the left fairly quickly.

There is a lot of rancor in this thread. I think it's because we are just SO inundated with eco-bullshit nowadays.

This is a thread that exists just to express that rancor. The direction this thread takes early on is completely predictable by anyone that reads these comments regularly. (This is utterly typical of "the leftists", that concern over the environment is a form of fascism, etc...)

The rancor here isn't because the common man is fed up with faddish environmental posers, though that may be true. The rancor here is coming from the same people that post here day-in and day-out, and guess what the problem is this time? Same as it is every other time: The "liberals" are a bunch of sleazy dishonest self-righteous fascist thugs. They think they're so smart, but they're not.

This story is a dripping piece of red meat custom-cut for 'conservatives' that get off on feeling victimized. And there is no shortage of them around here.

Well, I've condemned it as a crime here repeatedly, so take that as my position, Gahrie. The title of the thread is taken from the interview with one of his neighbors, as well, so there's no lack of clarity on that point.

So, wear a t-shirt, sport a bumpersticker, write your local newspaper, stand on the street and point and laugh--about any issue that catches your fancy. But don't beat up people or break their stuff.

vet66Spot recycled nickel price = $14/poundSpot recycled lead price = $1.40/poundLarge battery sized lumps of lead are not landfilled. Even larger battery sized lumps of nickel will not be landfilled either. Re-refining costs will change recycle price of each metal, but its too valuable not to recycle. I read that Toyota will recycle it. If the dealer doesn't know, thats par for the course for auto dealers. No money in it for them.On another note, Volkswagen announces a car that gets 62mpg. Oh, wait. Its a diesel Polo and Europe only.

I have to say, however, that as years have gone by I've become much less judgmental of peoples' living situations. It's really kind of a quirk of late 20th century America that we frown upon living with one's parents rather than "making it on one's own" as it were. Now that my dad has passed on, I often wish I'd been less eager to totally strike out on my own and make my way in the world without either of my parents around.

So, I don't offer any criticism of people who live with their parents. I've known a lot of freaky people who live on their own.

I think it would be different slant to the story if the man were living with his Dad, or it was a woman living with a parent. Momma's Boy has much different connotations than other parent/offspring combinations.

Chuck, you are correct. Recycling of car batteries has been going on for over 80 years and "recycling" is the only legal way to dispose of used ones. That said any permit to build (well forget that) or expand/continue to operate a domestic lead recycling plant is met with fierce opposition by many of the same folks who claim moral superiority for driving a hybrid. This hostile environment has created a huge market for shipping used batteries to third world countries where the enviromnetal and human health consequences are dire.

As for Beth, and the rest of you. I think we have made some good points and crossed a few lines but really its not been nearly as ugly as some other threads around here lately. For the record, Hummers are stupid and anyone who defaces one, for any reason, is a criminal at best and a probably a terrorist.

Calling attention to the fact that the 32 year-old guy lives with his mom and drives a Hummer is in the same category as noting that in her campaign video, Hillary is offering Bill carrot sticks instead of onion rings. These are not full-fledged philosophical positions. They are toss-away observations best delivered with a raised eyebrow and a smirk.

How is this any worse than random vandalism? Or vandalism because they thought the victim was an asshole (for example, the occasional high school practice of flattening a disliked teacher's tires, keying his/her car, etc.)?

It isn't, and that's sort of the point. Yes, this was a hate crime, and no, that doesn't make it worse than any other crime.

That's a lesson proponents of "hate crime" laws would do well to learn.

Beth: It's never right to destroy what belongs to someone else. Who needs this repeated to them? Only the criminals who vandalize. I don't think they're reading this blog entry.

I wouldn't find it surprising if they were googling up every word said about them, both to check on if they're likely to get caught and to further enjoy what they did. So they might stumble across this blog sooner or later. But whatever.

The idea that it's cool for you to ridicule a crime victim you know almost nothing about with all your prejudices and Freudian speculations, but no one should comment on what kind of woman reads about a crime and her first reaction is to mock the victim, is the most ridiulous thing in this thread.

I drive a humble but reliable Corolla, but if SUV drivers are gonna be attacked by Nazis and then ridiculed after they're attacked, I might have to consider getting an Escalade in solidarity.

Calling attention to the fact that the 32 year-old guy lives with his mom and drives a Hummer is in the same category as noting that in her campaign video, Hillary is offering Bill carrot sticks instead of onion rings. These are not full-fledged philosophical positions. They are toss-away observations best delivered with a raised eyebrow and a smirk.

The Clintons are public figures who expect to have their lives gone over with fine tooth combs and who have held up their entire life stories as a basis for why they should be the most powerful couple in the world. This Hummer owner is only in the public eye because he was the victim of a crime, and that's really all we know about him. He's not running for anything. He just wants to be able to park his car outside his home.

Certainly. How many ruined cars with FOR THE ENVIRON scratched into it, every window smashed, and each tire knifed are required to count as "news" or "meaningful"?

No one's arguing that it isn't news, or meaningful. It's not the zeitgeist deserving of handwringing and somber reflection that some want to make it.

I think it was just one black guy, beat up by cops in 1991, that triggered massive rioting in LA.

The riots involved more than that. The "one black guy" represented the one black guy beat up by cops that broke the camel's back. If this was one more in a long history of battered Hummers, it would be a different story. If the police battered this Hummer and then tried to cover it up, it would likewise be a different story.

C'mon, folks, it's just one guy.

I must just be having an inappropriate humor day, but Pogo, I couldn't help but see William Shatner in full stage mode when I read that last line. I love William Shatner.

Beth said: "If this was one more in a long history of battered Hummers, it would be a different story"

And you don't think that this isn't one more on the string?

I haven't put a bumper sticker on my car in Californian in the Bay Area since 2000 for fear of having my car (a 4x4 SUV) keyed or worse in a parking lot. Putting campaign signs on your yard is also a signal for "liberals" to trash your house and landscaping.

Nothing like free speech and the ability to express yourself without fear of reprisal from people who consider themselves champions of the underclass and oppressed. Hypocrites to the max!

Beth: I appreciate your humor in suggesting that the victim's Hummer is a substitute "Cod Piece!"An extension of the male "package" so to speak. Living with Mom is also fair game when driving an obviously raised,inflated, and adorned mode of transportation. That is exactly what crossed my mind when I read the article. It was also a backstory. Don't beat your breast anymore in supplication.

Back on point, there has been a history of Hummer burnings at car dealerships, and a fairly recent arson that destroyed some extremely expensive logging equipment. There have also been torchings of ski lifts and custom homes in Colorado, if I am not mistaken by ecoterrorists (ELF) although the early members have been martyred (sarcasm here) by incarceration. I recall steel spikes in trees in Oregon to injure loggers. When the loggers had the effrontery to protect themselves using metal detectors, before sending the trees to the saw, the environmentalists exhibited their extreme sensitivity to human life by replacing the steel spikes with ceramic. Ever witness a spinning saw blade come apart at speed?

ELF is a terrorist organization, and the tree spiking put them outside the pale of meaningful activism altogether. If they had any guts they'd do straight-up, peaceful civil disobedience, take the legal consequences (see MLK Jr.'s criteria for CD), and build on the publicity to make their case to the public.

The problem with MLK and his admonition to CD is the baggage that follows each movement. The loons from both sides tag along on the periphery and the results are often deadly. Witness the demise of MLK. Remember the song from the 70's, "Abraham, Martin, and John" sung by Dion?

Responsible movements keep this in mind and don't act surprised when their movements are hijacked/perverted. Moderate muslims are currently violating this axiom. People who worry about the environment provide cover for the radicals.

In Basketball it is referred to as a "screen" whether intentional or otherwise. To ignore this strategy of the psychopaths among us is naive and dangerous.

vet66, no disagreement on the point about movements being hijacked, but for a closer view of what I referred to, read the portion of Letter from a Birmingham Jail that outlines the four requirements for acting in civil disobediene: determine the facts to show an injustice exists; negotiate (which could resolve the whole thing; if negotiation fails, self-purify--i.e., examine your motives and methods; and finally, take direct action. And in that step, he states, "One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty." No monkeywrenching trees or breaking windows or throwing molotov cocktails and scampering off in black masks. Direct action is peaceful confrontation, and the willingness to be carted off to jail. It's not just a tantrum against a bad law.

Groups like ELF deviate from, or hijack, valid political and social movements and do nothing to remediate the injustice around which the movement organized.